This blog is about spiritual awakening, maps and stages, the blinding effects of our strong momentum/conditioning (karmic propensities), view, realization, experience, etc. If you're new here, I recommend going through the 'Must Reads' articles (see sidebar). For discussions you are welcome to join the Awakening to Reality Facebook group

The
limitless awareness here is referring to the cultivation of the four
brahma viharas, particularly the quality of equanimity. It does not mean
an awareness independent of the six senses.

...

“Here
a bhikkhu abides with a mind imbued with loving kindness ( metta)
pervading one direction, likewise the second, likewise the third, and
likewise the fourth direction, above, below , around, and everywhere, to
all as to himself, he abides pervading the all-encompassing world with a
mind imbued with loving-kindness, abundant, expansive, boundless,
without hostility and without ill will.“ He abides with a mind imbued with compassion ( karuna)…..”“ He abides with a mind imbued with altruistic joy ( karuna, sympathy in other’s welfare)…..”“
He abides with a mind imbued with equanimity ( upekkha)pervading one
direction, likewise the second, likewise the third, and likewise the
fourth direction, above, below , around, and everywhere, to all as to
himself, he abides pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind
imbued with equanimity, abundant, expansive, boundless, without
hostility and without ill will. This is called the limitless
awareness-release.”

Either
way, I think it's important to have a grasp of what is meant by
viññāṇakkhandha in a Buddhist context before delving into the matter.

My
grasp of it, for example, is that viññāṇa is a momentary1 phenomenon --
each instance to be considered as separate from another -- whereas the
colloquial understanding of the English word "consciousness" or
"awareness" might be that it's a single thing that exists behind the
scenes that pops in and out here and there across the sense spheres.

Edit:

1
Perhaps a more unambiguous/correct way to express what I'm trying to
say here is "diachronic yet with discernible start and end"

Soh Wei YuTheravada Buddhism has many meditation lineages in Thailand, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and so on.

I
find that Thai Forest monks (of which Ven. Thanissaro is part of) have a
tendency to reify an eternal awareness. It's a very strong tendency
that has a long history in their lineage
masters. The only exception I know is Ajahn Brahmavamso (who daringly
criticised this tendency within his Thai forest lineage/tradition) and
Ajahn Buddhadhasa

The Vipassana teachers of Myanmar and Sri Lanka are not so much affected by this tendency.

GGThe
problem with the statement "eternal awareness" is that it is timebound.
I mean.... what could "eternal" mean in a timeless context? Also, that
there is continuity or that there is not, are also timebound concepts
that just dont apply to the non-temporal present.

What is there to reify or not-reify where there is neither otherness nor thisness?

GGSoh,
when you say, "the limitless awareness here is referring to the
cultivation of the four brahma viharas, particularly the quality of
equanimity", you mean it is the same as saying "all is limitless mind"?

There
is no timeless context besides impermanence and time. Each moment of
impermanence and time is being-time, and thus in that sense,
timelessness is experienced.

I like Dogen's teachings very much.

Thusness, 2007:

(11:11 AM) Thusness: Whenever we read the most basic teachings of Buddha, it is most profound.(11:11 AM) Thusness: Don't ever say we understand it.(11:11 AM) Thusness: Especially when it comes to DO (Dependent Origination).(11:12 AM) Thusness: which is the most profound truth in buddhism.(11:12 AM) AEN: icic..(11:12 AM) Thusness: never say that we understand it or have experienced it.(11:12 AM) AEN: oic(11:12 AM) Thusness: even after few years of experience in non-duality, we can't understand it.(11:13 AM) AEN: icic..(11:14 AM) Thusness: The one great zen master that came closest to it is Dogen.(11:14 AM) Thusness: that sees temporality as buddha nature.(11:15 AM) Thusness: that see transients as living truth of dharma and the full manifestation of buddha nature.

Time
is just a construct like self. The notion that it takes time for me to
walk from point A to B, which implies distance, space and time,
deconstructs when we realize there is no atemporal abiding entity or
self that is the traveller (this implies I am a truly existing atemporal
self that is separate from time/the stream of transient phenomenality,
which is not the case). In fact there is not even 'traveling' or
'movement' when Point A is only point A or being-time-A, point B is only
point B being-time-B, each instant is whole and complete - there is
nothing subjective or objective that is separate from each time-instant
that abides and travels from A to B. Where time is being and being is
time (things do not occur 'in' or 'pass through' time - they ARE time,
as everything is irremediably temporal), there is Only being-time which
is the sun and the moon and the stars, wherein there is neither an
atemporal object passing through time nor an atemporal subject
witnessing or passing through the passage of time and space from one
point to another, and neither is it the case of one thing becoming
another thing (winter is winter, spring is spring, winter does not turn
into spring). Each instance of sight, sound, etc, is an entire and whole
being-time independent of past and future (it occupies or IS a unique
manifestation-position), yet inclusive of all causes and conditions
spanning all time-space in a single moment that transcends the
structures of time-object-self dichotomy. Each instant is a happening
without movement. Time stops in the midst of temporality but Not by
transcending to some unmoved backdrop.

Time
is just a construct like self. The notion that it takes time for me to
walk from point A to B, which implies distance, space and time,
deconstructs when we realize there is no atemporal abiding entity or
self that is the traveller (this implies I am a truly existing atemporal
self that is separate from time/the stream of transient phenomenal...

I think realization and development will eventually reach the same destination.

A practitioner that experience the “Self” will initially treat1.The “Source as the Light of Everything”.then2. He/she will eventually move to the experience that the “Light is really the Everything”.

In
the first case, the Light will appear to be still and the transience
appears to be moving. Collapsing of space and time will only be
experienced when one resides in Self. However if the mind continues to
see the 'Light' as separated from the 'Everything' , then realization
will appear to be apart from development.

In the
second case when we experience the “Light is really the Everything”,
then Everything will be experienced as manifesting yet not moving. This
is the experience of wholeness and completeness in an instantaneous
moment or Eternity in a moment. When this experience becomes clear in
practice, then witness is seen as the transience. Space and time will
also collapse when we experience the completeness and wholeness of
transience. An instantaneous moment of manifestation that is complete
and whole in its own also does not involve movement and change (No
changing thing, only change). Practicing being 'bare' in attention yet
at the same time noticing the 3 characteristics will eventually bring us
to this point.

However what has a yogi overcome
when moving from case 1 to 2 and what exactly is the cause of separation
in the first place? I think realizing this cause is of utmost
importance for solving the paradox of realization and development.

19th February 2011There
are two phases to Anatta in my experience which corresponds to the two
stanzas of Anatta in Thusness's article On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness,
Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection.In
the beginning... when I had the sudden realization by contemplating on
Bahiya Sutta, there was a very clear realization of 'in the seeing just
the seen' - the second stanza of Anatta in Thusness's article... seeing,
hearing, is simply the scenery, the sound, it is so clear, vivid,
without dualistic separation (of subject and object, perceived and
perceived)... there never was, there is only the music playing and
revealing itself. The scenery revealing itself...It is
very blissful, the luminosity is very clear and intensely felt. Yet it
became a sort of object of attachment... somehow, even though luminosity
is no longer seen as a Self or observer, there is still a sense of
solidity that luminosity/presence is constantly Here and Now. A subtle
tendency to sink back into substantialist non-dualism is still present.Later
on, I came to realize that luminosity, presence itself, is ungraspable
without solidity. Much like the first stanza of Anatta in Thusness's
article. There is no luminosity inherently existing as the 'here and
now'... presence cannot be found, located, grasped! There is nothing
solid here. There is no 'here and now' - as Diamond Sutra says, past
mind is ungraspable, present mind is ungraspable, future mind is
ungraspable. What there is, is unsupported, disjoint thoughts and
phenomena... There is only the ungraspable experiencing of everything,
which is bubble like. Everything just pops in and out. It's like a
stream... cannot be grasped or pinned down... like a dream, yet totally
vivid. Cannot be located as here or there.Prior to this
insight, there isn't the insight into phenomena as being 'scattered'
without a linking basis (well there already was but it needs
refinement)... the moment you say there is a Mind, an Awareness, a
Presence that is constant throughout all experiences,318that
pervades and arise as all appearances, you have failed to see the
'no-linking', 'disjointed', 'unsupported' nature of manifestation.The
luminosity and the emptiness are inseparable. They are both essential
aspects of our experiential reality and must be seen in its seamlessness
and unity. Realizing this, there is just disjoint thoughts and
phenomena arising without support and liberating of their own accord.
There is nothing solid acting as the basis of these experiences and
linking them... there is just spontaneous and unsupported manifestations
and self liberating experiences. Simpo_ described it well recently:Will like to add that, in my experience, no-self is a more subtle insight than non-duality.Usually,
we see a continuity of mental formation... well... my experience is
that it is not always so. The streams of thought seems to be linear but
it is not.. To my experience, it is the fast movement of thoughts that
give the impression of continuity of self.Now...
thoughts can appear and disappear and they do not have to be linear...
'Simpo' the name pop up and dissapear... another image appears and
dissapears... all of them are not self... just appearance, sensations,
etc... and we cannot say they arise from a base or sink into the base.
There is no base (as far as I see it)... just this ungraspable appearing
and dissappearing.Without this realization, one can never hope to understand this phrase in Diamond Sutra:Therefore
then, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva, the great being, should produce an
unsupported thought, i.e. a thought which is nowhere supported, a
thought unsupported by sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touchables or
mind-objects.应无所住而生其心This is the phrase that got 6th Ch'an Patriarch Hui-Neng his great enlightenment after the 5th Patriarch explained it to him.A
lot of people think they understood this, yet they are merely
disassociating from phenomena and thoughts... this is not what is meant
here. What Diamond Sutra described here requires the insight into
emptiness... without which all are just contrived practice based on our
paradigm of duality and inherency.It is all just a
matter of depth... one phrase... everyone claims to understand it, but
do they truly penetrate its depth and essence? Non-enlightened people
think they understood it, people at the I AM phase think they understood
it, non dual people may think they understood it, etc... we all think
we have grasped it, but true understanding comes via penetrating the
twofold emptiness.

GGSoh.
It is amazing how mind has this drive to want to anchor in some
"substance", even if unsubstantial. Now, something is not clear in the
following sentence:

"It is amazing how 'inherent' view prevents us from seeing freedom as no-doership, interdependence and interconnectedness, luminosity and non-dual presence"

Inherency
prevents us from seeing freedom as non-doership; alright. But then it
goes on saying, "(prevents us from seeing) interdependence and
interconnectedness". Does this not contradicts seeing phenomena as
disjointed and unconnected - a fact so many times mentioned as a
"quality" of true realization of anatta and sunatta?

An
example of such mention taken from above: "(...)What there is, is
unsupported, disjoint thoughts and phenomena... There is only the
ungraspable experiencing of everything, which is bubble like".

Soh Wei YuDisjoint
and unconnected in the sense that there is no underlying substratum and
linking agent that is carried on or persisting from from moment to
moment. It is not disjoint and unconnected in the sense of negating
interdependencies.

Like if you have
a sense that "last thought came, this thought arrived, next thought
arriving, but I AM constant throughout, or the NOW is unmoved
throughout" that is not being 'disjoint and unsupported'.

But
even though they are disjoint and unsupported and groundless by nature,
unproduced by any linking agent, one must further penetrate into the
total exertion of that disjointed thought/sensation/experience. Then
furthermore, one may see the karmic conditions in play (this is
completely missed out by the neo-Advaitin circles):

As Thusness wrote before,

This arising thought and previous thought, are they same or different?This arising thought and previous thought, are they dependent or completely independent?

Beyond the extremes, see the middle path of dependent origination.

...

penetrate deeply into the following aspects:1. The amazing power of the spell of an arising thoughtClearly
understand the power and implications of this arising thought. It is
the mystery of all mysteries. When this arising thought sees
dualistically and inherent, everything appears infinitely separated and
apart. That is all that matters.

2. Look deeply
into the cause of suffering as a result of dualistic and inherent
thought rather than thought self liberates, penetrate the ‘cause and
conditions’ of suffering.

When an arising thought see dualistically, how the entire experience is shaped.

When an arising thought sees inherently, how the entire experience has changed.

With this as the cause, what happens, with the absence of that, what happens.

3.
There is no willing off of dualistic and inherent thought, that would
be self-view. If there is no doership, is overcoming possible?

From
this understand, an arising thought is not just an arising thought, but
the total exertion and entire chain of conditionality is in action.
Clearly understand the difference between self-view and principle of
conditionality with direct experience. The overcoming is not by way of
self-view approach but by understanding the principle of
conditionality.)

Soh Wei YuAs
Thusness wrote in 2014: "If we continue to look for the carrying medium
between 2 moment of thoughts, profound insight of anatta will not arise
and non-locality will not dawn. Our mode of perception will be obscured
by the inherent way of understanding things."

This
also relates to many people asking the question of rebirth, since
rebirth is taught by Buddha. In Hinduism the jivas (souls) are the
medium which persists after death and reincarnates, until they are fully
absorbed into and dissolved into Brahman through Self-Realization. But
if in Buddhism there is no soul, no self/Self whatsoever, what is it
that is reborn, if there is no 'carrying medium'?

Actually
it's just action, tendencies, and the manifestation/reactions of these
action (karma) and tendencies, both from moment to moment and life after
life. It's no different from how rebirth is taking place moment by
moment even in this lifetime.

Continuing
consciousness after death is, in most religions, a matter of revealed
truth. In Buddhism, the evidence comes from the contemplative experience
of people who are certainly not ordinary but who are sufficiently
numerous that what they say about it is worth taking seriously into
account. Indeed, such testimonies begin with those of the Buddha
himself.

Nevertheless, it’s important to understand
that what’s called reincarnation in Buddhism has nothing to do with the
transmigration of some ‘entity’ or other. It’s not a process of
metempsychosis because there is no ‘soul’. As long as one thinks in
terms of entities rather than function and continuity, it’s impossible
to understand the Buddhist concept of rebirth. As it’s said, ‘There is
no thread passing through the beads of the necklace of rebirths.’ Over
successive rebirths, what is maintained is not the identity of a
‘person’, but the conditioning of a stream of consciousness.

Additionally,
Buddhism speaks of successive states of existence; in other words,
everything isn’t limited to just one lifetime. We’ve experienced other
states of existence before our birth in this lifetime, and we’ll
experience others after death. This, of course, leads to a fundamental
question: is there a nonmaterial consciousness distinct from the body?
It would be virtually impossible to talk about reincarnation without
first examining the relationship between body and mind. Moreover, since
Buddhism denies the existence of any self that could be seen as a
separate entity capable of transmigrating from one existence to another
by passing from one body to another, one might well wonder what it could
be that links those successive states of existence together.

One
could possibly understand it better by considering it as a continuum, a
stream of consciousness that continues to flow without there being any
fixed or autonomous entity running through it… Rather it could be
likened to a river without a boat, or to a lamp flame that lights a
second lamp, which in-turn lights a third lamp, and so on and so forth;
the flame at the end of the process is neither the same flame as at the
outset, nor a completely different one…

"Then, as for extremely subtle entities,Those who regard them with nihilism,Lacking precise and thorough knowledge,Will not see the actuality of conditioned arising."

Can
anyone explain this a bit? What is being referred to as extremely
subtle entities that may be regarded with nihilism, lacking precise and
thorough knowledge?

Thank you for input.

Malcolm wrote:

The extremely subtle existents are particles, paramanus.

A more precise translation would be:

Although the aggregates are serially connected,the wise are to comprehend nothing transfers.Someone, having conceived of annihilation,even in extremely subtle existents,is not wise,and will never see the meaning of ‘arisen from conditions’.

The auto commentary states with respect to this:

Therein,
the aggregates are the aggregates of matter, sensation, perception,
formations and consciousness. Those, called ‘serially joined’, not
having ceased, produce another produced from that cause; although not
even the subtle particle of an existent has transmigrated from this
world to the next.

The purpose of this is to point
out that even though nothing transfers from this life to the next, the
assertion that even a subtle particle is annihilated is false. Why?
Because in Madhyamaka causes and effects are neither the same nor
different.

These different links, twelve in number, Which Buddha taught as dependent origination, Can be summarized in three categories: Mental afflictions, karma and suffering.

The first, eighth and ninth are afflictions, The second and tenth are karma, The remaining seven are suffering. Thus the twelve links are grouped in three.

From the three the two originate, And from the two the seven come, From seven the three come once again— Thus the wheel of existence turns and turns.

All beings consist of causes and effects, In which there is no ‘sentient being’ at all. From phenomena which are exclusively empty, There arise only empty phenomena. All things are devoid of any ‘I’ or ‘mine’.

Like a recitation, a candle, a mirror, a seal, A magnifying glass, a seed, sourness, or a sound, So also with the continuation of the aggregates— The wise should know they are not transferred.

Then, as for extremely subtle entities, Those who regard them with nihilism, Lacking precise and thorough knowledge, Will not see the actuality of conditioned arising.

In this, there is not a thing to be removed, Nor the slightest thing to be added. It is looking perfectly into reality itself, And when reality is seen, complete liberation.

This concludes the verses on ‘The Heart of Dependent Origination’ composed by the teacher Ārya Nāgārjuna.

GGAnother
question. Is there any concern whether disjointed phenomena are
connected to "senses" (seeing, hearing, sensing... which, BTW, are just
constructs dependent on name and form)? Or... the very freedom related
to non-doership wipes away any such concerns(whether there are or not
senses)?

Soh Wei YuYou
should understand this in terms of equipoise (non conceptual meditative
state actualizing the realization of anatta in living experience) and
post-equipoise (in daily living not formally meditating, while engaging
in concepts).

In equipoise, there
is no concepts, no self/Self, no sense of seer-seeing-seen,
hearer-hearing-heard. Just a seamless boundless field of vivid clear
manifestation/luminosity, happening spontaneously and freely. We need to
spend quality time in the state of equipoise after the realization of
anatta.

In post-equipoise, when dealing with
concepts and constructs, once seen in terms of dependent origination and
dependent designation, they do not cause obscurations. You clearly see
that the conceptual constructs of 'seer', 'seeing' and 'seen' or any
other conceptual constructs are completely dependently designated and
lacking of any intrinsic existence of any sort, are not referencing
anything truly existing, and so you completely understand the
conventional dependencies of all these elements yet do not fall into
reification of these elements as truly existing and real, even while
thinking and conversing in conventions for practical, pragmatic purposes
in mundane living.

Then you will understand the
problem lies not so much in 'thoughts' per se but in the delusion and
framework of inherency (inherent existence) and duality (subject object
duality). Otherwise, one will mistakenly think that 'thoughts' are the
source of our confusion when actually it's the wrong view and paradigm
that we hold ignorantly to be true that is the source of our confusion,
clinging and suffering. Afterwards, non-conceptual experience is still
natural (it's natural after anatta) but non-conceptuality no longer
becomes the primary object of practice, (such as trying to maintain a
state of 'no-thought' 24/7 which is impossible anyway, especially if we
are not on retreats and are encountering people and work), rather it is
to see clearly with wisdom to dissolve our delusions and clinging.

After
anatta, although it's important to dedicate quality time to meditating
and vipassana and non-conceptual direct mode of perception while
practicing the Satipatthana (the four foundations of mindfulness) and
Anapanasati (mindfulness of breathing), still, we should not be afraid
of concepts, or of further understanding the view of dependent
origination and emptiness as a raft, until they are fully realized and
actualized. There must be a balance between nonconceptual experience and
view. I've seen people who after some insights into I AM and nondual,
become so afraid of concepts that they detest and have a kind of phobia
towards any form of contemplation and further refining of view, and so
are stuck at where they are for years and years, no progress. Even after
anatta one should not fall into this 'disease of non-conceptuality' as
Thusness puts it in http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../the-disease-of...

As
Rob Burbea said, "In the Dzogchen tradition, there’s a very beautiful
saying – very simple but very beautiful. And it says, “trust your
experience, but keep refining your view.” Trust your experience, but
keep refining your view - there’s a lot of wisdom in that, a lot of
wisdom. "

"If
asked what I am most drawn to (in Tsongkhapa's teachings), I am most
drawn to Prasangika's "mere imputation". The quintessence of "mere
imputation" is IMO the essence of Buddhism. It is the whole of 2 truths;
the whole of 2 folds. How the masters present and how it is being
taught is entirely another matter. It is because in non-conceptuality,
the whole of the structure of "mere imputation" is totally exerted into
an instantaneous appearance that we r unable to see the truth of it. In
conceptuality, it is expanded and realized to be in that structure. A
structure that awakens us the living truth of emptiness and dependent
arising that is difficult to see in dimensionless appearance.""In
ultimate (empty dimensionless appearance), there is no trace of causes
and conditions, just a single sphere of suchness. In relative, there is
dependent arising. Therefore distinct in relative when expressed
conventionally but seamlessly non-dual in ultimate."

"When
suchness is expressed relatively, it is dependent arising. Dependent
designation in addition to causal dependency is to bring out a deeper
aspect when one sees thoroughly that if phenomena is profoundly without
essence then it is always only dependent designations."

- Thusness, 2015

And more recently:

"When
you are luminous and transparent, don't think of dependent origination
or emptiness, that is post-equipoise. When hearing sound, like the sound
of flowing water and chirping bird, it is as if you are there. It
should be non-conceptual, no sense of body or me, transparent, as if the
sensations stand out. You must always have some quality time into this
state of anatta. Means you cannot keep losing yourself in verbal
thoughts, you got to have quality hours dedicated to relaxation and
experience fully without self, without reservation."

Many see non-conceptuality as like phase 4 insight and freedom from conceptualities and viewsJohn TanSunday, August 4, 2013 at 9:49pm UTC+10

To me it is a form of actualization of our view and insights so that view does not remain just conceptual and intellectualJohn TanSunday, August 4, 2013 at 9:51pm UTC+10

When we embrace the view of emptiness, anatta, DO... We must experience the impact of these views in real-time.

John TanSunday, August 4, 2013 at 9:54pm UTC+10

Just
like I kept why does duality seem so real, true and actual when the
framework has invaded consciousness from top to bottom. So ask yourself
why when u embraced a view of non-inherent, non-dual, non-arising,
non-abiding ... It does not integrate seamlessly into our experience?John TanSunday, August 4, 2013 at 9:57pm UTC+10

I
hv told u when u experienced clean pure clarity, u must also understand
how "view" affects us...but not to mistake that u should b free from
view.

John TanSunday, August 4, 2013 at 10:03pm UTC+10

Emptiness
is a view that de-neutralizes all inherent view...as long as u
understand what that means, it does not matter. Otherwise it just keep
breaking down recursively.

John TanSunday, August 25, 2013 at 1:02pm UTC+10

These
r 2 different practices u must know. One is being bare and the other
integrating view and experience. The former is purely and attempting to b
non-conceptual and freedom from view. The later is not letting the
"view" being simply resting at the conceptual level but having real-time
actualization of the view in experience (non-conceptual). U must
understand the 2. This is what I hv been telling u abt maha and requires
the view much like how dualistic and inherent view invaded
consciousness. U must understand and correctly discern the 2.

Soh Wei YuAlso
you need to actualize the view of Dependent Origination to experience
the Maha of Total Exertion. This is different from merely anatta
non-conceptual experience of luminosity.

6/11/2012 9:28 AM: John: Nobody mind self can still remain at pure awareness lvl6/11/2012
9:30 AM: John: The measurement is to total giving up so that the
experience of how immensely is this web of interpenetration is
experienced as this moment of arising is important6/11/2012
9:31 AM: John: U need to practice with the view in mind to see the
interconnection, not non-conceptuality of whatever arises6/11/2012
9:34 AM: John: There r two practices, one is feel the intensity of this
moment of arising till there is no mind, body, self..directly right
into the place where there is no heat or cold6/11/2012
9:34 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Maha is like seeing all causes and conditions being
seamlessly connected in one suchness but not in terms of interaction of
entity right6/11/2012 9:34 AM: John: The intensity of our luminous essence6/11/2012
9:36 AM: John: The other is holding the view in mind till body, mind,
self, universe is being deconstructed in this immerse interconnectedness6/11/2012 9:36 AM: John: They r different6/11/2012 9:36 AM: John: Yet both practices r equally important6/11/2012 9:38 AM: John: One is total non conceptuality, one is full integration of the view of interconnectedness6/11/2012 9:39 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Oic..6/11/2012
9:43 AM: John: In non conceptuality of in hearing, just sound...there
is no mind, no self, no hearer, just this sound. This universe is fill
with the arising sound... Clear vivid and non-dual...u practice the
intensity of luminous essence6/11/2012 9:45 AM: John:
But hearing sound, deep in u, u see the empty nature of arising, u see
the stick, the drum, the ear drums, the sound ... This requires view...
And not non conceptuality6/11/2012 9:47 AM: John: If u
continue to see this perpetually, then the mind, body, universe
construct will also be dissolved and experience turn maha and
dimensionless...get it6/11/2012 9:49 AM: Soh Wei Yu: I think so6/11/2012
9:49 AM: Soh Wei Yu: When I contemplated on d.o. There was a glimpse
like all the entities deconstructed into a seamless activity. I'm not
sure if this is related to maha.6/11/2012 9:50 AM: John: Yes6/11/2012 9:51 AM: John: But this is different from anatta6/11/2012 9:51 AM: John: And the practice is different6/11/2012 9:52 AM: John: U may not even experience non dual6/11/2012 9:52 AM: John: But the practice must be integrated into the luminous essence6/11/2012
9:54 AM: John: Becoz u cannot correctly discern the two that is why I m
pointing out to u. But ultimately all must be integrated, the view,
the experience and realization

It
seems to me that the view has a relevant importance in the nature of
experience, it functions almost as if a limiting trail. This is what I
meant by "as-if-ruling-view".

So, what I am saying
is that such prevailing view must be taken in consideration and somehow
accommodated into experience of anatta and sunatta. This is quite
unrelated to what has been written above - something more generic.

Soh Wei YuOne
must have direct insight into how prevailing view shapes and is exerted
as this very experience. Our karmic propensities and conditioning is
vividly present and manifesting, nothing hidden. Just like the anatta of
a sound, one has to directly realize
the views and karmic propensities face to face like how we taste a
sound, otherwise we are seeing karmic propensities as hidden ghosts and
entities as if they are some hidden subcoscious hiding somewhere, in the
same way we reify awareness into some invisible entity hiding somewhere
prior to anatta insight that penetrates that image and tastes directly
in all vivid manifestation

Action, conditioning, views, clinging... there is no actor, doer behind but the full exertion of conditioning

The
seemingly complete realness or solidity of sense of self, or Witness,
or Unchanging Awareness, or world, and all manners of grasping are all
the conditionings and karmic activity at play

..........

GGSoh, you wrote this 6 years ago. Would you still fully resonate with it today?

"You
are not trying to get to a state... But to realize what you already
are. So inquiry is not about a particular passing state but realizing
the source. Whatever method you use must
only direct you to the source. Who or what is aware of clear mind? What
is undeniably present and existing in the gap of no-thought? That is
what you must discover, the source of mind. It is a kind of effortless
effort, it is not exactly very effortful. It simply requires genuine
investigative curiorisity to know the truth of your intimate being. In
the end it is something even more intimate and closer than your breathe,
it is just You all along."

"The notion that You are
distant is making things appear difficult or effortful. It creates the
appearance of a distance or gap. But this imaginary gap is entirely
conceptual.

Drop your concepts, You are what remains, only pure presence-existence-consciousness-being-bliss."

I was in the I AM-realization stage when I wrote that. I progressed to anatta within the same year.

Self-inquiry
no longer suits me. After Self-Realization, there is a doubtless
certainty of Being that was never lost, so I no longer needed to do self
inquiry. I had a certainty that Awareness is what I am, and it is not a
maintenance state, not something I can 'gain' and 'lose'.

Having
quality time each day to formal meditation is important for progress.
And even if one has completely freed oneself from all
obscurations/defilements and 'done what is to be done' and attained the state of an Arahant or Buddha,
they still continued to practice the four foundations of mindfulness,
and the mindfulness of breathing, they still go for retreats and so on,
according to the suttas, as these practices lead to a 'pleasant abiding'. This is the means to develop both insight and
tranquility/samadhi, both of which are necessary for liberation.

In
fact after anatta, 'vipassana' and 'mindfulness' will become quite
natural and effortless, and one will 'want' to do that naturally. The
tendency to feel, sense, everything vividly and directly will
automatically arise.

You will understand after
anatta why mindfulness and vipassana is peculiar to and emphasized by
Buddha (rather than self-inquiry) and how vipassana, mindfulness,
anatta, impermanence, etc are all related. The view, the realization,
the experience, the path of practice are all very coherent and in sync.

Soh Wei YuIn
the Anatta phase, the pure sense of Existence/I AM even without
concepts is not denied but seen in its proper perspective -- as simply
another aggregate or pure consciousness experience in an aggregate.
Presence is experienced as all aggregates, Buddha-nature
is seen as transience, not just the formless Mind aspect and
furthermore not reified into an unchanging Mind of any kind. The
formless Mind is not treated as something ultimate, special, changeless,
independent or a Background behind all stuff.

As Thusness wrote in 2011:

(1:01
AM) Thusness: pce (pure consciousness experience) is about direct and
pure experience of whatever we encounter in sight, sound, taste...the quality and depth of experience in soundin contactsin tastein sceneryhas he truly experience the immense luminous clarity in the senses?if so, what about 'thought'?when all senses are shutthe pure sense of existence as it is when the senses are shut.then with senses openhave a clear understandingdo not compare irrationally without clear understanding

(5:08 PM) Thusness: what is "I AM"is it a pce?is there emotionis there feelingis there thoughtis there divison or complete stillness?in hearing there is just sound, just this complete, direct clarity of sound!so what is "I AM"?(5:10 PM) Soh Wei Yu: it is the samejust that pure non conceptual thought(5:10 PM) Thusness: is there 'being'?(5:11 PM) Soh Wei Yu: no, an ultimate identity is created as an after thought(5:11 PM) Thusness: indeedit is the mis-interpretation after that experience that is causing the confusionthat experience itself is pure conscious experiencethere is nothing that is impurethat is why it is a sense of pure existenceit is only mistaken due to the 'wrong view'so it is a pure conscious experience in thought.(5:13 PM) Soh Wei Yu: oic..(5:13 PM) Thusness: not sound, taste, touch...etc

When
consciousness experiences the pure sense of “I AM”, overwhelmed by the
transcendental thoughtless moment of Beingness, consciousness clings to
that experience as its purest identity. By doing so, it subtly creates a
‘watcher’ and fails to see that the ‘Pure Sense of Existence’ is
nothing but an aspect of pure consciousness relating to the thought
realm. This in turn serves as the karmic condition that prevents the
experience of pure consciousness that arises from other sense-objects.
Extending it to the other senses, there is hearing without a hearer and
seeing without a seer -- the experience of Pure Sound-Consciousness is
radically different from Pure Sight-Consciousness. Sincerely, if we are
able to give up ‘I’ and replace it with “Emptiness Nature”,
Consciousness is experienced as non-local. There isn't a state that is
purer than the other. All is just One Taste, the manifold of Presence.

Manageawakeningtoreality.blogspot.comFour Foundations of Mindfulness: The Direct Path to Liberation2Like· Reply · Remove Preview · 1dSoh Wei YuSoh Wei Yu Many progress into I AM realization after they had insights into nondoership, like Elena of the liberation unleashed group1ManageLike· Reply · 1dGeovani GeoGeovani Geo "Presence" is one of the most elusive concepts/realizations. At the same time it is and it is not. It is the most obvious, the closest, but it is non liable to be pinpointed. It is all, nonetheless it is in each single also.1ManageLike· Reply · 22h · EditedPGPG Soh Wei Yu I am having many realization of no doer. In zazen I learn to relinquish all control and all grasping. If grasping happens, it happnes by itself and is inmediately let go of because of the seeing that it happened by itself. So it wil be. I feel like doing zen now again for 1 , 5 hours. I feel like nothing satisfied me. I feel like going deeper into zen now. I will read that link you posted and implement self inquiry. Is it good to ask myself ' who is doing zen?' in zazen?ManageLike· Reply · 17h · EditedSoh Wei YuSoh Wei Yu Just ask yourself "Who am I?"

Your experience of non doership is good but what's also very important is to directly realize your Luminous Essence.

This is why people like Elena Nezhinsky progressed into realizing the I AM through self-inquiry after they have realised nondoership, because they still lack the realization of Presence, so that realization of Pure Presence is their next stage.

Also you can read the book 'True Meditation' by Adyashanti, it also teaches the letting go of all control and doership as part of its method, yet also includes Self-Inquiry in order to realize Being/Presence-Awareness...I like Seung Sahn too, and have read thousands of pages of his works.

The
reason why I read so many of his writings is because I found it
resonating, direct, and similar to my anatta experience, however, the
only problem I have is his somewhat substantialist view, as in this article which is reifying a changeless mind or universal source and substance. (i.e. https://kwanumzen.org/.../1988/12/01/song-of-dharma-nature
) This is like having one mind view but having no mind experience.
Therefore realization of anatta is not just no mind experience, no mind
is an experience but insight of anatta must arise then refine one’s
view. The problem with most Zen (and other) teachings is lack of right
view, and yet Right View is deemed so important that Buddha placed it as
the First factor of the Noble Eightfold Path. Non-conceptual experience
and realization of nondual without right view will at most lead to
Thusness Stage 4. Nowadays I prefer the teachings of Zen Master Hong Wen
Liang (but he's in Chinese so I don't think you will understand) and
some other Soto Zen masters (as Dogen is very clear), their clarity and
depth of realization and view is there.

By the way I
am not saying this to discourage you from learning from Seung Sahn, in
fact, they have a lot to offer to your development. They also happen to
teach Self-Inquiry - asking yourself Who am I? Self inquiry and koan
training can lead to direct facets of realization, and the different
classes of koans can lead to different realizations. In fact if you do
self inquiry I will also recommend you the teachings of Ramana Maharshi,
even though it is not exactly Buddhist but Hindu. Although at some
further stages I no longer hold the view of an eternal Self, but the
teachings was helpful in pointing out and leading to my initial
realization of my luminous essence.

In my
experience, one should not get too attached to any teacher, but still it
is important to seek to learn whatever we can from any teacher. Some
day we may outgrow them in wisdom, who knows. But having blind faith in
one teacher or seeing that teacher as fully enlightened such that we
cannot surpass that teacher one day, is not so healthy IMO. All
teachers, like all teachings, should be seen as rafts, not clung to.

This
is also why I am not too keen on the Vajrayana form of guru devotion,
as it can easily lead to a form of attachment and even obstruct one's
progress eventually, along with some other issues with the guru model in
general (as you know, many cases of abuse, and so on). I prefer the
style of spiritual friendship as Greg Goode wrote - https://greg-goode.com/.../from-the-age-of-the-guru-to.../
. But that's just me, I like to think of myself as somewhat
anti-authoritarian or iconoclastic by personality (the likes of U.G
Krishnamurti and J Krishnamurti), but I'm sure many may prefer and
benefit from the Vajrayana style of practice.

Now
I am no authority of Dzogchen (in which Lineage and authorized teachers
are important) - which the word Rigpa comes from, so I can only report
to you what Lopon Malcolm - who was authorised by his guru Kunzang
Dechen Lingpa to teach Dzogchen, said.

According to
Lopon Malcolm, one only truly 'begins' Dzogchen practice when one has
the direct recognition of the clarity radiance of Rigpa. If you have not
recognised that clarity radiance of rigpa, there are methods like
Rushan and Semdzins to help you recognise. However this in itself is not
the realization of Emptiness, and the view of emptiness at this stage
can still remain inferential. The realization of emptiness happens at
the Third Vision of the Four Visions in Thodgal practice. The fourth
vision (a.k.a. the attainment of 'Rainbow Body') is the exhaustion of
all phenomena into the five lights where all traces of reification
dissolves completely, where everything dissolves into the colors, sounds
and rays as one's own state of empty-clarity.

In my
opinion - please don't quote me as I do not represent Dzogchen lineage,
the initial recognition of the clarity radiance of rigpa in Dzogchen or
the unfabricated Presence-Awareness is in fact similar to the Thusness
Stage 1. It is the begininng of one's path but not yet the realization
of emptiness, which only occurs later on.

Maharshi
is talking about the clarity radiance, except it is seen as an eternal
Self. But in further phases of practice one refines the view and
realizes that there is no self/Self/agent, in hearing only sound without
hearer, in seeing just colors without seer, etc.

I have read this very interesting link: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/…/mistaken-reality-…
So what I got from it is that the conceptual I or thinking is standing
in the way of seeing that awareness is illusory and only the seen and
the heard and the flower exists. There is no seperate flower in
existence made ouf of objective matter or quality. There is no flower
moving by the wind on the land. There is no bird flying in the sky from
left to right. There is no shapes. Only shaping of color. NO movement.

My question is if dropping all control and craving and just
surrendering your will be enough to see this what I said above. Is the
'I don't know-mind' method of Master Zen Seung Sahn enough to see it. Do
I need to find out that I am awareness first in order to drop if
afterwards and realize that there is only the seen? I don't see that I
am the awareness yet. Perhaps it is not a necessary step. Edit:
What I start to realize about awareness is that it is an object
appearing, like a sudden awakefullness in the body of realizing that
something just showed up like a thought. THen attention goes to the
thought or sound or sensation and that whole movement (which is
something that shows up, an appearnce) is what I call awareness. I
doubt.

Comments

Soh Wei YuDepends on teacher. But generally in Zen school you should go through the I AM first.

Years
ago I attended the dharma talk of the ex-Abbot's of Kwan Um School, Zen
Master Dae Kwang. He asked about the source, where does thoughts come
from, where does cause and effect come from, who am I? He rejected
people hitting the floor for that question. He said you came from
hitting the floor?

He was pointing out the I AM insight, the formless Self.

With that as basis one expands upon that insight into nondual.

The
realization of Presence is important for Zen, Dzogchen, etc. In
Theravada like Daniel Ingram, the Luminosity/Presence only becomes
clearer at later phases. But in Advaita or Zen or Dzogchen it is pointed
out from the start and with that taste one expands upon it, bring it to
all manifestations and realise its nondual, anatta and empty nature.

So in stages after I AM, it is not so much that I AM disappears but rather the taste of Presence in I AM is expanded and found in all dynamic and myriad manifestations, centerless, as there no 'The Center' anymore as each manifestation is 'a center' -- Presence has ten thousand faces rather than one face to cling to. What disappears is not Presence but the image of one face of Presence reified into a ghostly image of a changeless, special, independent entity behind all things -- this mental image is not the true face of Presence and is completely delusional although seems to be completely real prior to anatta insight.

Anatta and Pure PresenceSomeone told me about having been through insights of no self and then progressing to a realisation of the ground of being.

I replied:

Hi ____

Thanks for the sharing.

This
is the I AM realization. Had that realisation after contemplating
Before birth, who am I? For two years. It’s an important realization.
Many people had insights into certain aspects of no self, impersonality,
and “dry non dual experience” without doubtless realization of
Presence. Therefore I AM realisation is a progression for them.

Similarly
in Zen, asking who am I is to directly experience presence. How about
asking a koan of what is the cup? What is the chirping bird, the thunder
clap? What is its purpose?

When I talked about
anatta, it is a direct insight of Presence and recognizing what we
called background presence, is in the forms and colours, sounds and
sensations, clean and pure. Authentication is be authenticated by all
things. Also there is no presence other than that. What we call
background is really just an image of foreground Presence, even when
Presence is assuming its subtle formless all pervasiveness.

However
due to ignorance, we have a very inherent and dual view, if we do see
through the nature of presence, the mind continues to be influenced by
dualistic and inherent tendencies. Many teach to overcome it through
mere non conceptuality but this is highly misleading.

Thusness also wrote:

The
anatta I realized is quite unique. It is not just a realization of
no-self. But it must have first have an intuitive insight of Presence.
Otherwise will have to reverse the phases of insights

Soh Wei Yu"Don't
know mind" is just referring to non-conceptuality. Prior to conceptual
knowledge. Prior to concepts. What are you? Only don't know means don't
have concepts. Before concepts, what are you? Then one day don't know
mind becomes clear (non-conceptuality clears away concepts that blocks
direct realization) and one directly realizes and tastes one's luminous
Essence.

But the "don't know mind" can often lead to another extreme at later phases, the disease of non-conceptuality ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../the-disease-of...
). But as a skillful means to bring about an initial direct
non-conceptual realization of one's luminous essence, it's necessary. It
should not be seen as a finality or main object of practice or go into
the extreme.

Soh Wei YuThe
emphasis of Seung Sahn teaching is using non-conceptuality to have
direct no-mind experience (of mere colors, sounds, etc) by dissolving
concepts and subject-object division in living experience so that the
luminosity is tasted as the foreground without leaving a trace of a
background self. Also dissolving the gap between actor and action into
just action, or "Just do it".

But the lack of
realization of right view means one is not able to overcome self-view at
a fundamental level. A True Self that is not the aggregates,
changeless, lies behind the aggregates and yet becomes one with the
aggregates, a desync of view and experience. This is no different from
the Atman-Brahman view, the ultimate Controller, Self.

This is why Seung Sahn wrote in The Compass of Zen,

"The
most important thing is, Who is the driver of this car? You must answer
that. When it is time for you to get a new car, what kind of car you
will get? This is what the second gate asks. Someday you will have to
answer this question with your own life.But this car‘s
appearing and disappearing doesn‘t matter. What is your driver? Does
everybody understand their driver? [Hits the table.] That is your
driver. The universe and you become one point—your true nature driver
appears very clearly.When we die, where do we return
to? We have already seen how the body has life and death, but our true
self has no life and no death, no coming or going. So our body is
composed of four elements: earth, air fire, and water. When our body
dies, these for elements are all dispersed. Then your master—this things
that controlled your body—goes where? Remember, there is no coming, no
going, and no staying. Universal substance and your substancealways become one. [Hits.] Speech"

Soh Wei YuBy
the way just dropping control and surrendering will lead to the
experience of nondoership and being lived but not necessarily I AM
realization Nor nondual insights. For that you need self inquiry and
other nondual contemplations and koans. But all these insights should be
complemented.

I
do not see any mention by Seung Sahn on the first stanza or no agent,
and unlike your emphasis on non-doership and surrendering which is a
more passive form of practice, Seung Sahn emphasize more on the
experience of active non-dual action in full exertion. (Also,
non-doership is not the realization of first stanza or no agent --
non-doership is just an aspect of it, and one can still experience the
sense of an agent, watcher, and subject/object duality even while
phenomena are experienced to be happening spontaneously by itself in
nondoership - that is, an agent/watcher/etc exists but does not control
what happens)

To realize that non-dual in the Kwan
Um Zen school, keeping don't know mind is not enough, you need a koan.
But don't know mind (free your mind from concepts) is important while
doing any koan, as the answer can only be found through direct
non-conceptual realization, so any concepts are wrong. There is no
"correct" conceptual answer, the only correct answer is an expression
that arises from fresh and non-conceptual experiential realization and
taste of that moment.

What koans? You will have to ask a Zen master for that. Zen Master Seung Sahn emphasizes koan training for realization.

For
me, just the two stanzas of anatta and Bahiya Sutta are enough. But
there are many Zen koans that also lead to nondual and anatta
realization and other facets of realization.

"Before
birth, Who am I?" will lead to I AM realization. The following koans
lead to nondual, along with "What is the sound of one hand clapping?":

"How Can I Speak?

T'aego
was one of the great masters of the Korean Zen tradition. His wisdom
was such that he was able to unify the Nine Mountains schools of Korean
Zen into a single order (the Chogye Order, still the largest order of
Korean Zen).

He was a prolific writer of essays, talks, and poetry. Here's a poem for your consideration:How Can I SpeakAll phenomena are beyond names and formsThe sounds of the streams and the colors of the mountains are closestWhat is closest?You can only please yourself: how can I speak?

CommentaryT'aego's
poem has a teaching direction, with each line functioning as a koan
(Korean: kong-an). Here are questions that might arise from this poem:1. What does "all phenomena are beyond names and forms" mean?2. What does "the sounds of the streams and the colors of the mountains are closest" mean?3. What is closest?4. How can you speak?

In
the Korean Zen tradition, students are often asked to respond to
specific questions about a case or story. Some of the questions have a
"wide gate," through which several types of answers might pass. Others
have a "narrow gate," which would permit only a very precise answer. You
might consider each line of T'aego's poem from this perspective.

You can learn more about T'aego in A Buddha from Korea: The Zen Teachings of T'aego, by J.C. Cleary."

This one is taught by Zen Master Seung Sahn:

"The mouse eats cat-food, but the cat-bowl is broken. What does this mean?"

"original face is clear,manifest in the green pineas well as in the white rocks.if you wish to understandthe meaning of,the mouse eats cat food,and the cat’s bowl is broken;you must attainthat a quarter is alsotwenty five cents."

Don't
ask me for an answer because I'm not a Zen master, and koan answers are
not meant to be discussed publicly. Even if you realize the answer you
should not post it online, because it will cause concepts for other
people so it becomes more of a harm and hindrance than help. You have to
find a qualified Zen master to do koan training if you are interested.

It
is quite impossible to practice koan training without access to a
qualified Zen teacher as a Zen teacher is required to converse back and
forth with you while training in koan, to confirm your insights, or
repudiate, or give you a new koan, or guide you. That is, if you are
interested in pursuing this path.